ESPN NFL dynasty poll (alert: major NE homerisms)

[still_life]

http://sports.espn.go.com/nfl/index

70's Steelers
80's 49ers
90's Cowboys
Present Patriots

Finally they put a poll like this up, and the NE homers are out in full throttle. When you look at the map, notice Dallas is leading Texas with 54%, Pittsburgh leading PA with 50%, San Fran leading California with 45%, then you look at Mass. and it's 73% (!!) for New England.

So who's your pick? I pick the Steelers, and it's not for homer reasons, but for this: 4 Super Bowls in 6 years, and they didn't have a 3 year stretch of going one and done in the playoffs like the 49ers did. That's what separates it for me.

From most to least impressive, I'd rank them in the order I have them listed above.

[Vincewithouthee]

Yeah you pretty much said it for me. Haha, and yes it's not a homer reason.

No way does New England contend with the likes of the Steelers, 49ers, or Cowboys. I don't care what you say, I won't agree that they are.

[Doubleya2002]

I would say NE's is the most impressive only because they have to deal with free agency and the salary cap; none of the other teams on that list had to worry about that.

[still_life]

I would say NE's is the most impressive only because they have to deal with free agency and the salary cap; none of the other teams on that list had to worry about that.

Free agency and the salary cap has made teams weaker. The teams that were really good back in the 70's and 80's were so much better than what's together now. Even Dallas in the early 90's had excellent teams like the 49ers and Packers to play before they got to a Super Bowl, where they met Buffalo twice, a team that went to 4 straight SB's. You can't tell me winning 3 close games (with some major controversy in the first one) against a flash in the pan team like the 03 Panthers or the choking Eagles is as impressive as a team like Pittsburgh beating greats like Oakland and Indianapolis in their conference, then Dallas in the Super Bowl.

[hockey0001]

I think New England is the most impressive dynasty only because you are not supposed be able to sustain a dynasty now in the age of free agency and a salary cap. The other 3 dynasties were able to keep a lot of the same players throughout their dynasties.

However, if the question was which dynasty is the best in terms of talent and who would win if they played on an even playing field after all things considered, I'd have to go with the Steelers. This is a hard question to answer though because of how much bigger and better trained the players are now.

[b e L I E v e]

my vote for the niners brings them at 30 percent, and puts them on top

you gotta remember...it wasnt only the dynasty with super bowl rings..its the amount of time theyve had winning seasons..and playoff winning seasons...

[LeftWideOpen]

Free agency and the salary cap has made teams weaker. The teams that were really good back in the 70's and 80's were so much better than what's together now. Even Dallas in the early 90's had excellent teams like the 49ers and Packers to play before they got to a Super Bowl, where they met Buffalo twice, a team that went to 4 straight SB's. You can't tell me winning 3 close games (with some major controversy in the first one) against a flash in the pan team like the 03 Panthers or the choking Eagles is as impressive as a team like Pittsburgh beating greats like Oakland and Indianapolis in their conference, then Dallas in the Super Bowl.

The part that makes it so impressive is that while other teams shuffle parts in and out and contend once in a while, the Pats have been able to sustain their dominance. 14-2 for back to back seasons and 3 titles in 4 years is cerainly dominant.

[NetNerdsRevenge]

If they would of made the playoffs in 02 I would put them ahead of the cowboys. I think their 21 game win streak solidifies them as one of the great teams in history and if they can win it all again this year, one of the greatest, if not the single greatest team in history.

[b e L I E v e]

If they would of made the playoffs in 02 I would put them ahead of the cowboys. I think their 21 game win streak solidifies them as one of the great teams in history and if they can win it all again this year, one of the greatest, if not the single greatest team in history.
21 games...woopdedoo...49ers are the best dynasty

conversation over

[NetNerdsRevenge]

21 games...woopdedoo...49ers are the best dynasty

conversation over
hahaha, that was actually pretty funny. scene points.

[justinevans]

easily the 49ers...the 49ers had 20 plus straight winning seasons into the 80s and 90s.

If the Colts have home field, the Pats are done.

I would say NE's is the most impressive only because they have to deal with free agency and the salary cap; none of the other teams on that list had to worry about that.

they couldn't go out and just lure away free agents either.

[b e L I E v e]

hahaha, that was actually pretty funny. scene points.
appreciated...

i had to get my point accross

hah

[hockey0001]

If the Colts have home field, the Pats are done.


Right, because the Pats have never beaten Indy at the dome.

[b e L I E v e]

Right, because the Pats have never beaten Indy at the dome.
i cant decide whether your a sarcastic ass or just listing stats

[still_life]

If they would of made the playoffs in 02 I would put them ahead of the cowboys. I think their 21 game win streak solidifies them as one of the great teams in history and if they can win it all again this year, one of the greatest, if not the single greatest team in history.

Of course the 21/3 in 4 years already puts them as one of the greatest teams in NFL history, but the word dynasty? I don't think so. We're just starting the 2005 season. Who's to say a team can't come out this year and dominate the rest of the decade, making us almost forget about NE? The Steelers had a pretty good amount of success from 72-79, the 49ers from 84 through the late 90's really (though the dynasty is always reserved for Montana's 80's teams), and the Cowboys had a good 6 year stretch. The Pats are just 4 year wonders so far, with missing the playoffs in 02, something none of these teams did in their dynasty periods. That's why they're called the "70's Steelers", "80's 49ers", "90's Cowboys". The Patriots still can be beaten as the team of the 00's, but it will have to start this year or next.

Right, because the Pats have never beaten Indy at the dome.

No, but you're crazy if you don't think the game being in the dome greatly increases Indy's chance of winning/NE's chance of losing. The big reason they lost the 03 game was because Edge couldn't get it in at the goal line. They had that game won, but Edge couldn't do it.

[hockey0001]

i cant decide whether your a sarcastic ass or just listing stats
sarcastic ass. But i dont think that it matters where we play the colts: home, away, or neutral. We will still win. Our defense will confuse Manning and shut down the colts offense again. In all of the colts losses to New England in the playoffs, it hasn't been the defense that has let them down, its been their offense.

[still_life]

sarcastic ass. But i dont think that it matters where we play the colts: home, away, or neutral. We will still win. Our defense will confuse Manning and shut down the colts offense again. In all of the colts losses to New England in the playoffs, it hasn't been the defense that has let them down, its been their offense.

Giving up 200 yards on the ground, forcing no turnovers, and allowing multipe 7-9 minute scoring drives is horrible defense any way you look at it. And what was so great about the defense in 2003? They allowed 5 different drives to end in a FG. They couldn't buy a three and out, and they allowed 2 4th down conversions, while getting no sacks. With a bad o-line, no running game, and an inconsistent pass game, a defense can not be as horrible as Indy's has played up in New England and expect to win the game.

Last time in the dome, Manning threw 3 TDs in 6 minutes. If the defense/ST didn't give up 38 points, they win that game pretty easily.

[hockey0001]

Giving up 200 yards on the ground, forcing no turnovers, and allowing multipe 7-9 minute scoring drives is horrible defense any way you look at it. And what was so great about the defense in 2003? They allowed 5 different drives to end in a FG. They couldn't buy a three and out, and they allowed 2 4th down conversions, while getting no sacks. With a bad o-line, no running game, and an inconsistent pass game, a defense can not be as horrible as Indy's has played up in New England and expect to win the game.

Last time in the dome, Manning threw 3 TDs in 6 minutes. If the defense/ST didn't give up 38 points, they win that game pretty easily.
Yes thats true, but that was also a regular season game. Manning has done nothing against the Pats in the playoffs. 2 years ago he threw 4 interceptions and last year he was a dropped interception away from being shut out. Untill Manning and the Colts offense steps up against the Pats in the playoffs I will not be worried about beating them. The difference between the Pats defense and the Colts offenses is much bigger than the gap between the defenses. I would not be surprised if at the end of the regular season, the Colts and Pats are ranked 1-2 in offense.

[still_life]

I would not be surprised if at the end of the regular season, the Colts and Pats are ranked 1-2 in offense.

I would be. NE had no running game against the Raiders of all people. And they won't be gaining 300 yards through the air every week. Teams like Indy, KC, Minnesota, Green Bay, etc. will again be ahead of them.

[hockey0001]

I would be. NE had no running game against the Raiders of all people. And they won't be gaining 300 yards through the air every week. Teams like Indy, KC, Minnesota, Green Bay, etc. will again be ahead of them.

I expect their running game to improve throughout the season and Watson if comes close to all the hype surrounding him (from what people around here a saying youd think he's gonna be the greatest tight end ever) that would be a huge boost to our offense, allowing us to run some two TE sets. He did look pretty good last night though from what i remember.

I also don't think that they are gonna finish 1 or second in the league in offense, i think they'll be in the 3-6 range, but it wouldnt be a complete surprise.

[still_life]

I hope Watson is great, he's the TE on my fantasy team. NE couldn't even run the ball when they were in 2 TE sets last night for some reason. It'll get better, but Dillon definitely had a poor start to the year.

[b e L I E v e]

sarcastic ass. But i dont think that it matters where we play the colts: home, away, or neutral. We will still win. Our defense will confuse Manning and shut down the colts offense again. In all of the colts losses to New England in the playoffs, it hasn't been the defense that has let them down, its been their offense.
the Colts offence WILL finish first in the league...i can almost guarentee that, while the pats defence will rank in the top 5..i would have said first, but with recent losses in Tedy and Ty, i dont think they can make it up there with other defences picking up the pace in 05 06...

That said, the colts were constantly critisized for their defence...we all know that, and they were always cherished because of their offence, just the stats Still Life listed can prove that...so saying that their offence let them down is foolish...

Im not sure if Still had posted this, but the defence let up something like 35-40 points in one game vs NE ...while manning threw for three or four touchdowns...so no, its not the defence

[hockey0001]

the Colts offence WILL finish first in the league...i can almost guarentee that, while the pats defence will rank in the top 5..i would have said first, but with recent losses in Tedy and Ty, i dont think they can make it up there with other defences picking up the pace in 05 06...

That said, the colts were constantly critisized for their defence...we all know that, and they were always cherished because of their offence, just the stats Still Life listed can prove that...so saying that their offence let them down is foolish...

Im not sure if Still had posted this, but the defence let up something like 35-40 points in one game vs NE ...while manning threw for three or four touchdowns...so no, its not the defence
In the playoffs games, the games i was referring to in my initial post, Manning through 4 interceptions in the first one and got only 3 points in the second. The supposed greatest offense in histiry was a dropped interception away from being shut out. So yes, it is the offense.

[b e L I E v e]

In the playoffs games, the games i was referring to in my initial post, Manning through 4 interceptions in the first one and got only 3 points in the second. The supposed greatest offense in histiry was a dropped interception away from being shut out. So yes, it is the offense.
:shake:

If you honestly think the Colts offence sucks..and that the defence is good...i dont care what the hell kind of stats you give me...you NEED help

no offence,

[splitsecond]

I have to go with my '9ers. Their superbowls may have been more spreadout, but they were good for a long time, including into the 90s. I miss my 49er glory days. :(

[b e L I E v e]

I have to go with my '9ers. Their superbowls may have been more spreadout, but they were good for a long time, including into the 90s. I miss my 49er glory days. :(
you are my new favorite person

[hockey0001]

:shake:

If you honestly think the Colts offence sucks..and that the defence is good...i dont care what the hell kind of stats you give me...you NEED help

no offence,I dont think that the colts offense sucks. I said in another post that i expect them to finish 1st in offense. But their offense has not shown up against the Patriots in the playoffs. The defense has not been great, but they also have not been terrible or the main reason that the colts lost. If your offense only scores 3 points in a game, the defense has to be perfect. When the quarterback throws 4 interceptions in a game, it places a ton more pressure on the defense. The colts have a great offense, but in the playoffs it has let them down when the defense played respectable.

[b e L I E v e]

I dont think that the colts offense sucks. I said in another post that i expect them to finish 1st in offense. But their offense has not shown up against the Patriots in the playoffs. The defense has not been great, but they also have not been terrible and the main reason that the colts lost. If your offense only scores 3 points in a game, the defense has to be perfect. When the quarterback throws 4 interceptions in a game, it places a ton more pressure on the defense. The colts have a great offense, but in the playoffs it has let them down when the defense played respectable.
good point, but still

the reasons why the colts never beat the pats was never layed on just one part of the team...

[still_life]

I dont think that the colts offense sucks. I said in another post that i expect them to finish 1st in offense. But their offense has not shown up against the Patriots in the playoffs. The defense has not been great, but they also have not been terrible or the main reason that the colts lost. If your offense only scores 3 points in a game, the defense has to be perfect. When the quarterback throws 4 interceptions in a game, it places a ton more pressure on the defense. The colts have a great offense, but in the playoffs it has let them down when the defense played respectable.

Giving up 200+ rushing yards is not respectable at all. Neither is forcing no turnovers or allowing multiple scoring drives to go 7-9 minutes. They could not get off the field and give their offense a chance in the last game. In 2003, the offense was sort of worse, but the game was actually closer. Even with the 5 turnovers on offense, the Colts were still with the ball and down 7. Of course the refs screwed them with no holding calls, but they had their shot. The game might have been different if NE didn't have so many drives that lasted enough to get a FG. The defense has to play better than what they've done in the playoffs, and the offense needs better play from the offensive line.

And about the 5 turnovers Indy's offense had in 2003: they led to just 6 total points for NE. Of course the first Manning INT took away a possible 3 or 7 points. But NE took the ball 67 yards in a 13 play drive for a FG. After the second INT, the Patriots moved the ball 52 yards on 11 plays for another FG. The defense picked Brady off in the endzone after Manning's 3rd pick. Then the 4th pick came on 4th down at the NE 30, and NE went 3 and out. Marvin's fumble in the redzone before halftime was as costly as the worst Manning INT (the first one), because it took points away too.

[hockey0001]

I can see that this argument is not really gonna go any further, its pretty much gonna keep revolving around the same points and i dont think anyone's opinion is gonna change. I'll end by saying that it will be a good game on november 7th, and theres a good chance that it will determine who has homefield in the playoffs.

[EnderDove]

Steel Fucking Curtain

[b e L I E v e]

I can see that this argument is not really gonna go any further, its pretty much gonna keep revolving around the same points and i dont think anyone's opinion is gonna change. I'll end by saying that it will be a good game on november 7th, and theres a good chance that it will determine who has homefield in the playoffs.

november 7th it is...id like to place a bet that either of the two happens

Colts win..just a plain old win, i dont care how many points

Pats win by 1-3...the only way they can actaully win

[still_life]

4 points, 3 points. That's the difference between the last two regular season meetings, and each game was decided on the last play. I think the main difference betwen the reg. season and playoffs is that the first two games are played in a dome and a September night, and the other two are in garbage January weather from New England. Dome teams do not win outdoors in January. The 99-01 Rams offense played every playoff game in a dome.

[b e L I E v e]

4 points, 3 points. That's the difference between the last two regular season meetings, and each game was decided on the last play. I think the main difference betwen the reg. season and playoffs is that the first two games are played in a dome and a September night, and the other two are in garbage January weather from New England. Dome teams do not win outdoors in January. The 99-01 Rams offense played every playoff game in a dome.
says it all